Lecture given at University College Roosevelt in Middelburg (The Netherlands) on 25 April 2014, about 'the wicked problem of food security in EU policy formation'. Content: *What are wicked problems? *Why is food security a good example of a wicked problem? *How can this be observed in the EU's Common Agricultural Policy? *How does the European Commission deal with the wickedness of food security?

1. The wicked problem of food
security in EU policy formation
Jeroen Candel
25 April 2014, UCR Middelburg

2. About me
• Studied Public Governance in Utrecht
• PhD Candidate ‘food security governance’ at
Public Administration and Policy group of
Wageningen University
• Currently guest PhD at Antwerp Centre for
Institutions and Multi-level Politics, UA
• Main focus: food security controversies in EU
policy development

3. Structure of the lecture
• What are wicked problems?
• Food security as a wicked problem
Short break
• Food security in the EU Common Agricultural
policy
• How does the EU deal with the wickedness of
food security?

4. Wicked problems: context
• Introduced by Rittel and Webber 1973
• ideal of rational policy making: objective,
evidence based, professionals, and optimal
solutions  “the planning idea”,
“makeability”
• “popular attack”: increasing societal scrutinity
• Still: many problems solved

5. However:
• Some problems particularly stubborn
• Cannot be solved in terms efficiency only
• Involve wide range of values
• Goal formulation proved difficult
• “One of most intractable problems is defining
problems” and identifying actions

6. Wicked problems
• Paradigm science and engineering not
applicable to problems of open societal
systems
• These problems are inherently different
• Tame vs. wicked problems
• Ten properties

7. Properties wicked problems
1. No definitive formulation: is the problem!
2. Have no stopping rule
4. No immediate test of solution: consequences
cannot be predicted
6. No enumerable set solutions: rely on poltical
judgment
7. Unique
8. Can be symptom of other problem
9. Discrepancy can be explained in numerous ways
 Planner/expert also player in political game

8. Examples?

9. After Rittel & Webber
• Thinking engrained in Public Administration
and Policy studies
• However: still many wicked problems
approached as if they can be solved
• Particularly also in life sciences: climate
change, sustainability, nature conservation,
and food security
• Recent decade: what type of governance
systems needed?

10. Food security
Food security defined as:
“all people, at all times, having physical, social
and economic access to sufficient, safe and
nutritious food to meet their dietary needs
and food preferences for an active and healthy
life” (FAO 2003)
Availability, access, utilization, and stability

11. 2007-2008 & 2010 food price crises

12. Solubility
Isn’t it just a matter of giving food to people?

13. Food security as a wicked problem
• What is the problem? Food production?
Sustainability? Inequality? Trade barriers?
• High degrees uncertainty
• Conflicting problem definitions and solutions
• Cross-scale: short vs. long term, multi-level
governance, multi-sector
 Nobody is against ‘food security’, but what is
meant with it? And how to address it?

15. Big debate in Wageningen

17. Food security in the CAP
Candel, J.J.L., Breeman, G.E., Stiller, S.J.,
Termeer, C.J.A.M. (2014) Disentangling the
consensus frame of food security: the case of
the Common Agricultural Policy reform
debate. Food policy 44: 47-58
• CAP: main EU agricultural steering device
• 2009-2013 reform
• Convergence, greening, safety nets

18. Research puzzle
• Pervasiveness of food security arguments
• What do actors mean when they invoke food
security? What claims do they make?
• Analysis stakeholder input
• Identification of 6 frames: cognitive and
communicative stories that actors use to make
sense of the world

19. Productionist frame
• Produce more food (double in 2050)
Stimulating production and productivity
• EU food security not self-evident
• Threats: volatility and dependence on imports
• Solutions: income support, same criteria for
imports

20. Environmental frame
• Focus on negative effects intensive agriculture on
environment
• Long-term perspective
• Problems: climate change, environmental
degradation (soil, biodiversity, etc.)
• Greening, better targeting of support, change
towards more plant-based diets

22. Development frame
• Focus on impact CAP on food security developing
countries
• European vs. global food security
• Income support considered as core problem & negative
socio-environmental impacts imports
• Solutions: eliminate trade-distorting measures, allow
developing countries to protect their markets, policy
coherence

24. Wickedness
• Various, sometimes conflicting problem
definitions and solutions
• Today’s problems emerge as a result of trying
to understand and solve yesterday’s problems
• Solubility? Highly political!
How do EU policy-makers deal with this?

25. Ongoing research
• Focus on European Commission
• Interview round at DGs (Devco, Agri, MARE,
Trade, Envi, SG, ECHO, Sanco, etc.) in Spring
2014
• To what extent is Commission capable of
dealing wisely with the wicked problem of
food security in its policy formation process?

27. Theoretical debate
“the Commission is highly ‘stove-piped’, its
administrative code is burdensome, it is resource-
poor, and it is heavily dependent for its success on
its relationship with other EU institutions. And still
it is tasked with trying to solve ‘wicked problems’,
whose very nature makes it unlikely that they can
be solved by administration that strictly observe
their own administrative code, especially one as
cumbersome as the under which the Commission
operates.”
(Kassim et al. 2013)

28. Counter argument
• Many developments that are aimed at
enhancing coordination: stronger role SG,
impact assessments, inter-service
consultations
• Kassim et al.: personal networks matter!
 In depth study of case food security

29. Preliminary findings
• Fragmented approach (not necessarily bad!)
• Approached as technical excercise, but highly
political!
• Services have own views, but cooperate
relatively well
• Many demands and views: balancing act
• High dependence on Parliament and Council

30. Preliminary conclusions
• Formal structures and procedures both hinder
and enable governance of wicked problems
• Informal processes ‘oil in the machine’
• Steering capacaties Commission limited

31. Looking back
• Many policy problems can be characterized as
wicked
• Food security is a good example of a wicked
problem
• FS in the EU is characterized by conflicting
frames (CAP reform)
• The wickedness of FS poses specific challenges
to the Commission, to which it is only partly
able to respond

32. Thank you for your attention!
Any questions?
Contact details:
Jeroen.candel@wur.nl
Twitter: @JeroenWUR